Professionalism of Information Management in Health Care: Development and Validation of the Construct and Its Measurement.

BACKGROUND: Against the background of a steadily increasing degree of digitalization in health care, a professional information management (IM) is required to successfully plan, implement, and evaluate information technology (IT). At its core, IM has to ensure a high quality of health data and health information systems to support patient care. OBJECTIVES: The goal of the present study was to define what constitutes professional IM as a construct as well as to propose a reliable and valid measurement instrument. METHODS: To develop and validate the construct of professionalism of information management (PIM) and its measurement, a stepwise approach followed an established procedure from information systems and behavioral research. The procedure included an analysis of the pertaining literature and expert rounds on the construct and the instrument, two consecutive and comprehensive surveys at the national and international level, exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses as well as reliability and validity testing. RESULTS: Professionalism of information management was developed as a construct consisting of the three dimensions of strategic, tactical, and operational IM as well as of the regularity and cyclical phases of IM procedures as the two elements of professionalism. The PIM instrument operationalized the construct providing items that incorporated IM procedures along the three dimensions and cyclical phases. These procedures had to be evaluated against their degree of regularity in the instrument. The instrument proved to be reliable and valid in two consecutive measurement phases and across three countries. CONCLUSION: It can be concluded that professionalism of information management is a meaningful construct that can be operationalized in a scientifically rigorous manner. Both science and practice can benefit from these developments in terms of improved self-assessment, benchmarking capabilities, and eventually, obtaining a better understanding of health IT maturity.

Quality Requirements for Electronic Health Record Systems*. A Japanese-German Information Management Perspective.

BACKGROUND: For more than 30 years, there has been close cooperation between Japanese and German scientists with regard to information systems in health care. Collaboration has been formalized by an agreement between the respective scientific associations. Following this agreement, two joint workshops took place to explore the similarities and differences of electronic health record systems (EHRS) against the background of the two national healthcare systems that share many commonalities. OBJECTIVES: To establish a framework and requirements for the quality of EHRS that may also serve as a basis for comparing different EHRS. METHODS: Donabedian's three dimensions of quality of medical care were adapted to the outcome, process, and structural quality of EHRS and their management. These quality dimensions were proposed before the first workshop of EHRS experts and enriched during the discussions. RESULTS: The Quality Requirements Framework of EHRS (QRF-EHRS) was defined and complemented by requirements for high quality EHRS. The framework integrates three quality dimensions (outcome, process, and structural quality), three layers of information systems (processes and data, applications, and physical tools) and three dimensions of information management (strategic, tactical, and operational information management). CONCLUSIONS: Describing and comparing the quality of EHRS is in fact a multidimensional problem as given by the QRF-EHRS framework. This framework will be utilized to compare Japanese and German EHRS, notably those that were presented at the second workshop.